Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I had the opportunity this morning to listen to Senator Green's, Senator Faruqi's and Senator Van's speeches in relation to this bill, the Australian Education Legislation Amendment (Prohibiting the Indoctrination of Children) Bill 2020, and I might just reflect briefly on Senator Van's contribution. I thought it was a thoughtful contribution to the debate. While I largely disagree with many of the conclusions that Senator Van reached, it underscored the importance of the way in which we disagree and how important it is in this place that we spend a bit of time reflecting carefully on what it is we're going to disagree about. I think it would be useful to have a debate about the curriculum in education and the balance between the hard skills that Senator Van was talking about—he said, colloquially, 'reading, writing and 'rithmetic' but I think he would concede that could go more broadly across the sciences, geography and a proper appreciation of English literature and the great things that can happen for students in the study of English literature—and how much we value critical thinking, the spirit of inquiry and research skills. Those are useful things that this place could spend its time debating and considering.

I also think that the contributions from speakers before me emphasised how difficult these unprecedented times and the necessary public health response have made it for students, particularly students in years 11 and 12. All of us in this place should send a message to those students and their teachers across the country, but particularly in Victoria, where uncertainty has made studying much harder—where accessing content and lessons through Zoom, or whatever the platform schools are using, has made their work more difficult—that we appreciate their work and wish them the best and that, no matter how this year and next year go, those students and their teachers will be supported.

Labor opposes this amendment bill because it undermines evidence based teaching. It would mandate the teaching of conspiracy theories in our schools. It appears to have, on the face of it, significant constitutional difficulties, and, even if you accept Senator Hanson's outline of the desired intent of the bill, it's very unlikely that it would be able to achieve its objectives. We in this place should be focused on the overall performance of our schools. We should be focused on equality of access to top-quality education. We should be focused on inclusion: including all of our students in a decent, high-quality education in a school system where they feel valued and supported and where they can make choices about deepening their study and acquiring the skills that will support them in their later lives. We should be about excellence, equity and participation.

This preoccupation by some with matters of sex, gender and climate change as the focus of what the parliament should be talking about is unnecessarily prurient. It is an effort by some to frighten people in the Australian community and create division and, indeed, hatred where there should be excellence, equality, inclusion and a focus on making sure all of our kids in the school system are looked after. That means low-income families, disadvantaged families and regional families should all have an equal go. All kids should be included, regardless of their gender or gender identity, their sexuality or their background. It is a confusing and challenging time for kids, particularly around issues of gender and sexuality. It is hard enough for adolescents, without making it worse, without us in this place making it tougher for kids.

The curriculum taught in our schools should be based on evidence and expertise. This amendment would undermine evidence. It would undermine evidence based teaching and would allow fringe conspiracy theories to be taught in our schools. The teaching of science is vital to our national interest. There should be more science, more maths and more evidence based material taught, not less. Now there comes from a fringe of conservative politics—a bit overrepresented in this place—a challenge to empiricism, a challenge to rationality in the post-Enlightenment era. These characters want to return to a sort of pre-Copernican and Middle Ages era where one person's superstition had as much value as scientific inquiry, and we should not indulge it. It might be in some people's temporary political interest to indulge it, but we should not indulge it.

We've seen over the past months the acceleration of climate change denialism being weaponised and fuelled by some in the Liberal and National Party. We've seen an acceleration in this unprecedented period of anti-vax conspiracy theories and 5G conspiracy theories. We've seen Mr Kelly, who's an enthusiastic proponent of conspiracy theories. We've seen his conduct over the course of the last few months. Never forget that Mr Kelly was Scott Morrison's preferred candidate in the recent Cook preselection. There was an enormous effort to overwhelm the local voters in Cook, who'd had enough of Mr Kelly's blatant—